-10-
Petitioner argues on brief that his reliance on materials
(the tax protester materials) and seminars provided by Irwin
Schiff (Mr. Schiff), constitutes reasonable cause for his failure
to file a tax return. Further, he asserts that, because he
relied on the tax protester materials, he did not willfully
neglect to file a proper tax return. The tax protester
materials, according to petitioner, misled him into believing
that a return was not required. Petitioner also asserts that he
relied on the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Long and believed that
his 1040 document was a valid tax return.
We reject petitioner’s arguments. First, petitioner did not
testify at trial and did not introduce any evidence regarding his
alleged reliance on the tax protester materials. Petitioner
first asserted that he relied on the tax protester materials in
his posttrial brief. Statements in briefs do not constitute
evidence. See Rule 143(b); Shepherd v. Commissioner, 115 T.C.
376, 399 n.22 (2000), affd. 283 F.3d 1258 (11th Cir. 2002).
Petitioner also asserts that he relied on Long and that his
reliance constitutes reasonable cause to believe that the 1040
document qualified as a return. Although petitioner cited Long
in the attachment to his 1040 document, petitioner did not cite
Long in his petition, his amended petition, or in his pretrial
memorandum. Nor did he testify or introduce other evidence at
trial concerning his alleged reliance on that case.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011